Quote:
Originally Posted by Newman
TB- Notice that Luke is more specific about what actually occurs with the smaller numbers and much more general with the bigger numbers. That's not all....
Luke writes about ressurected Jesus being on Earth for 40 days in the first chapter of Acts with almost nilch detail. What's up with that?
In fact, I read a book by an attorney, John W. Mauck, called "Paul on Trial" which makes an excellent case for the book of Acts being written as a trial brief on Paul's behalf. This would explain all kinds of things we don't find in Acts that we would expect to be there and things we are told that we wouldn't expect to be there.
The author goes through each chapter of Acts and shows how what was written was legally relevant to Paul's upcoming trial. In fact, Luke clearly lays out the position that Christianity was born of Judiasm [which had an exemption from Roman religion/pagan worship] and would be the basis for defending Paul at his trial.
Luke paid more attention to smaller groups of people and individuals (potential witnesses) then large groups of people (who were nameless).
Consequently, I would not be comfortable putting too much stock in the lack of detail about larger groups.  |
Very Good points and examples per the issue TB has.
The rest is interesting, but what was The Gospel of Luke? Exhibit A?
Though I think that both books might have been good evidence for Paul's trial, I somewhat doubt that this was the original intent, but I understand the attorney's viewpoint might
appeal to you.
Hybrid Mode
